The connection with Greek
philology consists in the imitation of its defects more than
of its excellences; for instance, the basing of etymologies
on mere similarity of sound both in Varro himself and in the other
philologues of this epoch runs into pure guesswork and often
into downright absurdity.(39)

39. Thus Varro derives -facere- from -facies-, because he who
makes anything gives to it an appearance, -volpes-, the fox, after
Stilo from -volare pedibus- as the flying-footed; Gaius Trebatius,
a philosophical jurist of this age, derives -sacellum- from -sacra
cella-, Figulus -frater- from -fere alter- and so forth. This
practice, which appears not merely in isolated instances but as
a main element of the philological literature of this age, presents
a very great resemblance to the mode in which till recently
comparative philology was prosecuted, before insight into
the organism of language put a stop to the occupation of the empirics.

In its empiric confidence
and copiousness as well as in its empiric inadequacy and want of method
the Varronian vividly reminds us of the English national philology,
and just like the latter, finds its centre in the study
of the older drama. We have already observed that the monarchical
literature developed the rules of language in contradistinction
to this linguistic empiricism.(40)

It is in a high degree significant
that there stands at the head of the modern grammarians no less a man
than Caesar himself, who in his treatise on Analogy (given forth
between 696 and 704) first undertook to bring free language
under the power of law.